Originally posted by: Fang Zei
The topic of this thread becomes all the more interesting when you consider that ILM recently sold off their model division. What ever happenned to the George Lucas of the OT? The one who went out to change the industry and give other film makers a chance? The flipside of the coin is that Lucas always talks about how he just knew Star Wars was going to flop, but he was going to get his movies made. That's another huge root of the problem, to him it's all about him. There's just too much evidence here. The Empire Strikes Back had the least involvement from Lucas and yet it's considered every bit as good if not better than Star Wars, a film that's undeniably considered a classic. He took more control over Return of the Jedi, and while at least he got a director and put star wars to rest with the trilogy completed, it's clearly the beginning of so much hypocrisy in him. He complained that he didn't have enough money while he was directing Star Wars, and yet now that he's in the position of executive producer himself he's overly concerned with saving money. Whatever happenned to that energy he had on Star Wars and Empire? Tightly bookending the production of Jedi with Indiana Jones movies probably didn't help much, but again this is all about taking control of things. The real problem with that is, and this is a question I pose, can you go too far in the name of "having control over things?"
Some people have argued that our problem as O-OT fans is that we seek collective ownership of Star Wars, but this is a drastic oversimplification of the problem. We look at it as a work of art, an opinion obviously not shared by its financier who seems determined to make whatever changes he wants just so he can make things conveniently sync up with the movies he made from '97 to '05. This is not responsible film making, folks, not by any measure. What we seek to do is not to give ourselves "ownership" of the art that is the O-OT, it is to take away this "ownership" from the financier. If Lucas is making all of these changes 20 and then 27 years later, couldn't it be argued that Lucas obviously took no pride in his work just as easily as it could be argued that the changes are "good?" There's the shame factor, but I'm not even going into that since this is turning into a basher rant.
Dean Devlin, the producer of Independance Day, said in regards to visual effects that "it's not the tool, it's the craft." Lucas, by even thinking that alteration and deletion of the groundbreaking visual effects work in Star Wars was a good thing, seems to have forgotten that people fell in love with the craft, not the technology. Yes, the dykstraflex was an innovative and groundbreaking technology in '76, but the effects done for the SE are in no way groundbreaking. If Lucas is so proud of what he's done, why did he feel the need to alter the original films for "a whole new generation?" If Star Wars is the classic film that it is, why was Lucas so concerned with updating it? If he makes it a different movie (which even from a legal standpoint he did, just read the copyright info in the end credits), how can people also be experiencing it "again?"
"I fear that my children will not be able to experience the movies that I grew up with." Thanks George, we do also. Last time I checked, it was 2006, not 1996, and a good deal of people have widescreen displays. All movies that were shot in anything wider that 1.78:1 are expected, not hoped to be, but expected to be recieving an anamorphic video transfer. Even the worst movies recieve anamorphic video on dvd. Lucas, you've released the OOT on dvd, yes, but our reactions and indeed the changes made to the homepage should tell you it's clearly not what we were asking for at all. If I ever have a kid, and he or she needs to do nothing besides load a dvd into the tray, why should he or she have to do anything more than that just so the picture will properly fill up the screen and even then at only sub-par resolution? I sure hope that Lucas's own kids don't buy into this "the artist's work is never finished" crap, but a lot of things point to that being the case, unfortunately.
Peterson is good to be writing a book entirely about models, especially in this day and age of IL(M). It's just too bad that LFL sees this as an opportunity to screen the "classic movie that started it all with Peterson's models and is also part of George's vision." George can call that "respect" if he wishes, but he shouldn't deny everyone the actual accomplishment that the O-OT is. He can have things both ways as long as he follows through on the oh so simple request we've made, and he might as well go all out for 2007 and just make whatever changes he damn well pleases. I mean, jeez, it's his movie, right?
Still sounds like you think this movie is yours… which you ineffectively veiled by describing the accusation as a “drastic oversimplification.” Nevertheless, this fact can’t help itself from rearing its ugly head throughout this entire post.
By removing GL from the position of artist to simply the “financier” of the movies you’ve “cleverly” taken ownership from him and placed it somewhere else… which around here could be Kurtz, Kirshner, Marquand, Bracket, etc…it’s an attempt to make yourself sound like a champion for everyone else who worked on the movies… (who have now apparently has been ripped of by GL with the creation of the SE) This championing has even seeped into the fans themselves, who by purchasing tickets and plastic shaped like R2-D2 now own a part of these movies as well.
Only on a Star Wars message board can the creator of the movies themselves be turned into the guy who signed the checks.